Gramsci and Trotsky in the Shadow of Stalinism: The ... - Indymedia

28 Gramsci and Trotsky in the Shadow of StalinismThus, while it is necessary to move Gramsci back to the political terrain towhich he belonged, this must be done critically, measuring his thought andpolitical practice against the forms of degeneration that afflicted the communistmovement—opportunism, bureaucratization, and totalitarianism.The difficulties involved in such an operation can be illustrated on thebasis of Gramsci’s own description of his experience:One’s critical self-awareness occurs . . . through a struggle of political‘hegemonies,’ of contrasting directions, first in the realm of ethics, thenin politics, arriving at a superior elaboration of one’s conception of thereal. To be conscious of being part of a specific hegemonic force (that is,political consciousness) is the first phase toward a further and progressiveself-awareness in which theory and practice finally become one . . .the unity of theory and practice is therefore not a mechanical, predeterminedfact, but a process of historical becoming. 31One should insist, first, on the importance of Gramsci’s political commitment.The fact that he belonged to a definite political tradition is aparamount, not incidental and detachable feature of his existence as an intellectual.In part, this is to insist on the question of Gramsci’s actual intent, ina way that locates it not in the principle of independent authorial authority,but, quite the opposite, in his organic and practical connection to a collectivepolitical movement. To borrow his own formulations, Gramsci was “consciousof being part of a specific hegemonic force,” and thus came to embodya “unity of theory and practice.” This unity, however, is not established onceand for all. It is not a “mechanical, predetermined fact” for us, as it was notfor Gramsci either, who had to attain it through the arduous process of selfdevelopmenthe describes. It was, instead, itself contested, as the productionand interpretation of Gramsci’s text became an important terrain ofpolitical struggle. Against Gramsci’s advice, this struggle today is not alwaysconducted in a politically conscious way on the part of those who wish toappropriate him. Today, as Brennan correctly laments, following a pinch ofHeidegger and a dash of Nietzsche, Gramsci often becomes one ingredientin an eclectic theoretical blend of what were politically hostile and incompatibletraditions. 32 A confrontation with Gramsci, therefore, should serve asan invitation to strive toward “critical self-awareness”—to understand whereGramsci stood politically as a way to understand where we ourselves stand.This struggle, however, at this stage cannot be conducted on a simple plane:for or against Gramsci, for or against Marxism. This is true because thepolitical tradition to which he belonged cracked, decisively, around the time